Military Aircraft Accident Summary: Tornado   GR4A ZG710

Lord Bach: My right honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for Defence (Mr Ivor Caplin) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	The Ministry of Defence has today placed in the Library of the House copies of the Military Aircraft Accident Summary of the RAF Board of Inquiry into the accident to Tornado GR4A ZG710, which was shot down during Operation TELIC by a US Patriot Battery on 22 March 2003.
	The Board of Inquiry found that the immediate cause of the accident was that the Patriot Battery, in following its self-defence rules of engagement, misidentified Tornado ZG710 as a hostile anti-radiation missile and engaged it. However, like most aircraft accidents, no single cause was to blame. There were several contributory factors. These included the failure of the Tornado's IFF (Identification Friend or Foe), the wide classification criteria for anti-radiation missiles programmed into Patriot system and the Patriot Rules of Engagement, which were not sufficiently robust to prevent a friendly aircraft without a functioning IFF system being classified as an anti-radiation missile.
	The war in Iraq was completed in a highly efficient and effective manner, for which all those involved must take great credit. As part of that campaign, the crew of ZG710 conducted a dangerous and demanding combat mission in an exemplary manner yet did not return safely. ZG710 was the only Royal Air Force aircraft lost during the war. The Board of Inquiry has established the causes of this tragic accident and has highlighted the various factors that contributed to it. The board's recommendations are now being implemented.

Use of Animals in Scientific Procedures

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My honourable friend the Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State for the Home Office has made the following Written Ministerial Statement today.
	The Government believe that current developments in science are providing significantly more opportunities to do work on the reduction of the number of animals used, the refinement of the procedures involved to minimise suffering, and the replacement of animal use (the 3Rs), and that to take advantage of these opportunities we should put more resources into this area and broaden the community of interest.
	I am, therefore, pleased to inform the House that the Government are setting up a new national centre for research into the 3Rs and animal welfare. The Centre for Best Practice for Animals in Research (CBPAR), established by the Medical Research Council, will form the core of the new centre. The new centre will be called the National Centre for Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research, and will act as a focal point for research into the 3Rs.
	This decision implements the recommendation by the House of Lords Select Committee on Animals in Scientific Procedures, in its report published in July 2002, that such a centre should be established, which we broadly accepted in the Government's reply in January 2003. The Government have today published a report prepared by the Inter-Departmental Group on the 3Rs (IDG3Rs) on the implementation of the Select Committee recommendation and have accepted its recommendation that responsibility for the new national centre should rest with the Office of Science and Technology, with its wider scientific remit, rather than with the Home Office, whose role is constrained by its regulatory function under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986. A copy of the Inter-Departmental Group's report has been placed in the House Library.
	Placing the lead responsibility with the Office of Science and Technology emphasises that the 3Rs, humane experimental techniques, and the development of advanced research methods are part of the mainstream United Kingdom science base. It also acknowledges that department's leading role in signalling both the financial and scientific benefits of such developments. In the initial stages the centre will need the wider support and structure that the MRC can offer.
	A new board will be set up to direct the centre and I am delighted to announce that Lord Turnberg has agreed to chair this board, aided by Professor Paul Flecknell as vice-chair. The remaining membership of the board will be appointed shortly. It is envisaged that all major stakeholder groups will be represented, including academics, government, industry and animal welfare groups.
	The mission statement for the centre will be:
	"The National Centre for the Replacement, Refinement and Reduction of Animals in Research is dedicated to the 3Rs—replacing, refining and reducing the use of animals in research and testing licensed under the Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986.
	Replacement is the ultimate aim for the Centre, but for so long as the use of animals continues to be necessary, it is essential that every effort is made to minimise their use and improve welfare. Ensuring that laboratory welfare is optimised is critical for scientific, legal and ethical reasons.
	The Centre's mission is to advance and promote the 3Rs in research and testing using animals. This will be progressed by:
	Developing a UK strategy for the implementation of the 3Rs;
	Supporting high-quality research that advances the 3Rs;
	Promoting a co-ordinated approach to 3Rs research;
	Providing advice and guidance on the 3Rs and animal welfare to the scientific community;
	Supporting the UK scientific community's commitment to best practice in all aspects of laboratory animal science and welfare;
	Working with regulators on the acceptance of alternative methods for regulatory toxicology."
	The first task of the new board will be to develop the mission statement into a detailed action plan.
	The Centre will require more funding than currently being made available to CBPAR. The Medical Research Council and the Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council have both agreed to double the level of funding provided this year and the Home Office will transfer its budget for research into the 3Rs currently administered by the Animal Procedures Committee to the centre once current commitments have been honoured. It is envisaged that funding for the centre will increase further in future years and Lord Turnberg will be discussing this with government. He will also discuss funding commitments with other funders of research involving animals.

Petroleum Act 1998: Out of Round Award of an Onshore Licence

Lord Sainsbury of Turville: My honourable friend the Minister for Energy, E-commerce and Postal Services (Stephen Timms) has made the following Written Ministerial Statement.
	I am pleased to announce to the House that I am today offering a Petroleum Exploration and Development Licence (PEDL 133) to Composite Energy plc to cover acreage in the counties of Falkirk and Clackmannanshire (Blocks NS88, NS89, NS97, NS98 and NS99).
	The company will have a fixed period in which to decide whether or not to accept the offer.

Emergencies: Guidance on Dealing with Fatalities

Baroness Scotland of Asthal: Guidance on Dealing with Fatalities in Emergencies has been published today on the UK resilience website (www.ukresilience.info). Copies have been placed in the Library of the House. The purpose of this guidance—which is directed primarily at local planners and responders—is to reaffirm, update and consolidate what emergency officers should consider when planning the response to an emergency involving fatalities. It is the product of consultation with a range of stakeholders—central and local government, and the emergency services among others—and builds on earlier guidance in Dealing with Disaster—Revised Third Edition
	Thankfully, mass fatality incidents have not occurred frequently in the United Kingdom. The emphasis of any response will focus on saving lives—but we must be prepared should the worst happen.
	But the guidance is by no means intended to be a stand-alone solution to ensure that there is sufficient capacity across the country to deal with such incidents. Work is being taken forward by the Home Office, in collaboration with the regions, the devolved administrations, planners and responders to establish existing levels of national capability. This should inform the development of a framework for a national response.
	The guidance will be revisited in light of developments stemming from the Civil Contingencies Bill, currently before Parliament, and a review of the coroner system, set out in the Home Office position paper Reforming the Coroner and Death Certification Service. We will also update and revise the guidance as findings emerge from research and scientific projects, and lessons are learnt from incidents both at home and abroad. Feedback on the guidance should be sent to feedback.massfatalitiesguidance@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk. It would be helpful to have these by 30 June 2004.